apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Colm MacCarthaigh <c...@stdlib.net>
Subject Re: several patches for Solaris >= 10
Date Wed, 21 Mar 2007 02:06:37 GMT
On Tue, Mar 20, 2007 at 09:32:32PM -0400, Stefan Teleman wrote:
> #if defined(SOLARIS2) && ((SOLARIS2 + 0) >= 10)
> #include <atomic.h>
> #if defined(USE_GENERIC_ATOMICS)
> #undef USE_GENERIC_ATOMICS
> #endif
> 
> If i am in Solaris >= 10 and i have the Solaris atomics, do i want to
> still need the generic atomics ?

That's not how it's structured. It's either generic atomics OR a
system/architecture specific implementation, there are valid reasons why
people may prefer generic atomics at build time. But the reason is more
our conventions; we should never over-ride a user-specifiable define.

> >Your patch also seems to be a diff against a httpd source tree, and
> >includes httpd-specific code. This is dev@apr, please use it only for
> >APR code, and it's best to submit patches against trunk , *not* whatever
> >httpd happens to ship :-)
> 
> yes it is against 2.2.4.

And is it any better than what we have in trunk? I see you're using the
_nv calls, I'm not sure if they mean "nevada" or "non-volatile" though
;-)

-- 
Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net

Mime
View raw message